Well known in the art are such ceiling-mounted air diffusers which, in each case, provide a plenum chamber above a ceiling of a room and from which air is discharged (usually, power-discharged, such as by pumping same, or the like) into the room therebelow through a suitable discharge opening (or openings) in the ceiling. Such well known prior art air diffusers, generally, require an air deflection surface appropriately positioned in the path of the airflow so as to be capable of effectively directing the airflow in (or into) a lateral outward pattern (having a substantial horizontal directional component) as it enters the room through the discharge opening (or openings) in the ceiling.
In one such prior art type of ceiling-mounted air diffuser, the above-mentioned air deflection surface is positioned at, below, or closely adjacent to, a lower surface (or plane) of the ceiling so as to provide the desired lateral deflection of the initially inappropriately directed moving air as it exits the plenum chamber into the room therebelow by way of the discharge opening (or openings) in the ceiling. In this particular prior air diffuser, it has been the conventional prior art practice to make the air deflecting member bearing the air deflection surface as part of, or in direct contact with, a ceiling suspension member (usually, a drop ceiling suspension member), or the trim thereof. Thus, this type of prior art air deflecting member forms what might be termed a deflection ledge and, preferably, should be made of very thin sheet metal, or the like, which is substantially flush with the bottom surface of the ceiling, or lower, in order to get the proper discharge air flow pattern (having a very substantial lateral directional component). However, this type of physical construction is saliently visibly obvious from below and, thus, provides a sharply discrete visual incongruity (or effective visual anomaly) for an observer in the room below looking upwardly and directly viewing the air diffuser from below. This may be architecturally and/or aesthetically undesirable for a variety of fairly obvious reasons.
A prior art type of such a deflection ledge (as referred to hereinbefore) may have a deflection ledge width of approximately 50% to 75% of the width of the corresponding discharge opening, thus greatly adding to the undesirable (design-appearance-destructive) visual anomaly, or visual incongruity effect produced thereby for any person positioned in the room below the air diffuser and looking upwardly at same, along with the rest of the drop ceiling in which the air diffuser is located. One such well known type of prior art air diffuser is described (and illustrated), for example, in prior U.S. Pat. No. 3,406,623.
Another, and later, prior art improvement is disclosed in another prior (and later) U.S. Pat. No. 4,135,441, wherein the discharge openings and the structures therein, or closely adjacent thereto, have been modified somewhat in an effort to make them less saliently visible from below, while attempting to provide the desired type of largely substantially laterally directed airlow--with limited success, it must be said because the approximately 11/2 inches wide rectangular slot formed by the discharge opening is necessarily black and is very much visibly saliently obvious to a viewer positioned in a room therebelow, particularly, when contrasted to the customary white appearance of most of the rest of a conventional drop ceiling (usually made up of a plurality of similar square or rectangular white acoustic panels, or acoustic tile panels) usually supported by a generally grid-like supporting framework. Furthermore, the plenum chamber interior baffling and the energy-wasting airflow conditions provided in this prior art type of air diffuser resulted in a substantial loss of potentially available operating efficiency during use thereof.
From the above discussion of the background and field of the invention, and of the prior art (and certain prior art major disadvantages), it is believed to be clear that any improvement in the air diffuser that would make the discharge opening less visibly obvious (and less visual-design-destructive) when viewed from below, and/or any air diffuser improvement which would provide enhanced operating efficiency (usually, because of substantial minimization of non-productive energy losses in the handling of the air flow through the air diffuser) would be extremely desirable.
It is precisely the immediately hereinbefore described improvements (any or all of same), and the consequent very desirable end-results arising therefrom, which are provided by, and in, the present invention. Therefore, it can be justifiably said that the present invention has certain major advantages which virtually completely overcome various important prior art disadvantages and limitations (including, but not being limited to, those mentioned hereinbefore).
Furthermore, it should be noted that all of the aforesaid advantages effectively flow from, and occur by reason of, the generic (but-different-from-the-prior-art) novel features of the invention pointed out (in representative, but not specifically limiting form) hereinafter.